IvedaAI: Password

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds a useful note about the response JSON structure ('status', 'truncated', 'timedOut'), which is beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose side effects like email sending or auth requirements for write operations. With annotations providing no safety hints, the description could be more transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded, with a brief response note followed by a compact list of operations. Every line is necessary and provides value. No redundant or vague wording.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers all operations and parameters comprehensively, which is critical given no output schema and minimal annotations. It could be improved by giving example responses or expected error codes, but the current level is sufficient for most use cases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides detailed parameter information for each endpoint, including names, types, and required markers (e.g., 'query: token*:string', 'body: { password*:string, username*:string }'). This goes far beyond the generic input schema, giving the agent exact parameter semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly lists all four operations with clear verbs and resources: 'Get available token', 'Forget password by email', 'Reset password by key', and 'Check if the password reset key has expired'. This clearly defines the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on other domains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes the tool's scope self-evident: it is for password operations. Each operation has a specific use case, and the context is clear. It does not provide explicit alternatives or exclusions, but the domain separation from sibling tools is obvious enough.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.